2024/03/31
崔明淑 - [제8 강 말과 존재 : 말은 브라만이다] 바르토리하리Bhartrhari ”변용은 말에 의한 파악이고... | Facebook
Adhyāsa - Wikipedia
Adhyāsa
Adhyāsa (Sanskrit:अध्यास Superimposition) is a concept in Hindu philosophy referring to the superimposition of an attribute, quality, or characteristic of one entity onto another entity. In Advaita Vedanta, Adhyasa means a false superimposition of the characteristics of physical body (birth, death, skin color etc.) onto the atman, and also the false superimposition of the characteristics of Atman (sentiency, existence) onto the physical body.
Origin[edit]
The first mention of Adhyasa is found within the Brahma Sutra Bhasya of Adi Shankara. Adi Shankara begins his commentary of the Brahma Sutras by explaining what Adhyasa is and its nature.
Shankara lists different views about Adhyasa from different philosophical schools, which suggests that the concept of Adhyasa certainly existed before Shankara.
Definition[edit]
In his introduction to the commentary on Brahma Sutras, Shankara gives a definition of Adhyasa as thus -
आह कोऽयमध्यासो नामेति। उच्यते स्मृतिरूपः परत्र पूर्वदृष्टावभासः। तं केचित् अन्यत्रान्यधर्माध्यास इति वदन्ति। केचित्तु यत्र यदध्यासः तद्विवेकाग्रहनिबन्धनो भ्रम इति। अन्ये तु यत्र यदध्यासः तस्यैव विपरीतधर्मत्वकल्पनामाचक्षते। सर्वथापि तु अन्यस्यान्यधर्मावभासतां न व्यभिचरति। तथा च लोकेऽनुभवः शुक्तिका हि रजतवदवभासते एकश्चन्द्रः सद्वितीयवदिति।।
Swami Gambhirananda translates it as -
If it be asked, "What is it that is called Superimposition?"- the answer is - "It is awareness, similar in nature to memory, that arises on a foreign (different) location as a result of some past experience. With regards to this, some say that it consists in the superimposition of the attributes on one thing on another. But others assert that wherever a superimposition on anything occurs, there is only a confusion arising from the absence of distinction between them. Others say that the superimposition of anything on any other substratum consists in fancying some opposite attribute on the very basis. From every point of view, however, there is no difference as regards the appearance of one thing as something else. And in accord with this, we find common experience that the nacre appears as silver, and a single moon appears as two."[1]
Karl H. Potter translates it as -
Now what is superimposition ? It is the appearance (ābhāsa), in the form of a memory, of something previously experienced in some other place. Other philosophers define superimposition in slightly different ways. Some say it involves the nongrasping of the distinction of two things leading to one being superimposed on the other. Others say it is the attribution to a thing of properties contrary to those belonging to that thing. In any case all agree that it involves the appearance of the properties of one thing in another. And this agrees with ordinary experience as reflected in the reports of illusions such as "the shell appears as silver" or "the single moon appears double."[2]
References[edit]
- ^ Gambhirananda, Swami (9 January 2016). Brahma Sutra Bhasya of Sankaracharya. p. 30. ISBN 9788175051058.
- ^ Potter, Karl (1981). Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies Vol III- Advaita Vedanta. p. 120. ISBN 9788120803107.
Adhyāsa : 네이버 통합검색 Superimposition 덧놓음(가탁) 付託 부탁
中央大学学術リポジトリ
https://chuo-u.repo.nii.ac.jp › record › files
小嶋洋介 저술 · 2017 — Le ma-ya- chez Toshihiko IZUTSU. 小 嶋 洋 介. 要 旨. 「東洋哲学」を思想視座 ... まず,一般に専門家によって「付託」と訳される adhya-sa(時代が下ると adhya-ropa ...
本質と自己
中央大学学術リポジトリ
https://chuo-u.repo.nii.ac.jp › record › files
小嶋洋介 저술 · 2017 — Le ma-ya- chez Toshihiko IZUTSU. 小 嶋 洋 介. 要 旨. 「東洋哲学」を思想視座 ... まず,一般に専門家によって「付託」と訳される adhya-sa(時代が下ると adhya-ropa ...
Shabda | Vedic, Upanishads, Brahman | Britannica
Bhartṛhari’s linguistic philosophy: Śabda Brahman and the question from Ineffability
BHARTRHARI - A LINGUISTIC PHILOSOPHER No World Beyond the Sphere of Language
The Brahman and the Word Principle ( Śabda ) 2009
[펌] 인도철학용어 무명 無明, 부탁(付託;adhyasa)
- 올바른 지식의 결여를 뜻하는 경우가 있으며,
- 불교에서는 12인연(因緣)의 제1지(支)로 보고 있다.
- 요가학파에서는 번뇌 가운데 가장 근본적인 번뇌를 가리키며,
- 단순한 지식의 무(無)가 아니라 지식에 대립하는 다른 지식으로서 실재한다.
- 샹카라는 부탁(付託;adhyasa)과 같은 뜻으로 해석하고,
- 갑(甲) 가운데 을(乙)을 상기하는, 일종의 심리·인식상의 오류라고 보았다.
- 그러나 그의 후계자들은 우주의 질료인으로 보고 마야와 동일시하였다.
- 그리스도교의 원죄(原罪)와 비교된다.
“브라만교의 깨달음은 ‘신에 대한 믿음’” 김왕근
우유적 속성 뜻: 사물이 일시적으로 우연히 가지게 된 성질.
데바닷타 - 나무위키 - 석가모니의 제자, 인도의 종교인
인도철학 -언어철학자들 : 바르트리하리와 만다나 미슈라
- 미망사와 니아야 실재론의 한 원리, 즉 사물자체와 접촉한다는 비개념적 지각이 존재한다는 원리를 부정한다.
- 그에게는 이것은 불가능한 일이다. 왜냐하면 모든 지식은 말에 의해서 관통되며 밝혀지기 때문이다.
- 따라서 모든 지식은 언어적이며 대상의 차이는 말의 차이로 환원된다.
- 형이상학적 어불이론은 이 이론에서 멀지 않다.
- 즉 한 단어의 본질은 인간의 상상적 구성력(kalpan)에 의해서 명색(名色)의 세계로 나타난다.
- 형이상학적으로 바르트리하리는 샹카라의 불이론이나 법칭과 같은 불교철학자의 학설과 매우 유사하다.
- 이 형이상학이론은 다른 또하나의 이론, 즉 스포타('의미가 거기에서 발생하게 되는 그것') 이론을 이용하고 있다.
- 대부분의 인도철학자들은 말이나 문장이 지닌 의미의 정확한 담지자가 무엇인가 하는 문제에 관심을 가지고 있었다.
- 만일 음절들이 일시적이며, 우리가 한 단어의 음절들에 의해서 생긴 음성을 듣는 데 있어서 각 음성이 그 다음 음성에 의해서 대체된다면, 어느 누구도 그 단어를 전체로 파악할 수 없다.
- 그러면 단어의 의미를 어떻게 파악할까 하는 것이 문제가 된다.
- 문장의 경우도 마찬가지이다.
- 미망사 학파는 음성의 영원성을 상정했고 영원한 음성 및 음성복합체(단어와 문장들)를 그것들의 화현에서 구별했다.
- 문법학자는 그 대신에 단어와 음성을 구분했고 단어 자체를 의미의 담지자로 간주했다. 이런 면에서 단어는 스포타인 것이다.
- 음성은 공간적이며 시간적 관계를 갖는다. 즉 상이한 화자(話者)에 의해서 다르게 산출된다. 그러나 의미담지자로서의 단어가 크기와 시간적 측면을 지닌다고 할 수는 없다. 그것은 분할불가능하며 영원하다.
- 스포타와 구별되는 것으로는 추상적 음성모형(prktadhvani)과 발화된 음(viktadhvani)이 있다. 나아가 바르트리하리에게 문장이란 단어의 집성이나 그것들의 질서 있는 계열이 아니다. 단어는 오히려 문장에서 추상화된 것이다. 그러므로 문장 스포타가 의미의 1차적 단위이다. 단어도 역시 프라티바로 불리는 순간적 직각에 의해서 한 단위로 파악된다.
바르트리하리 - 위키백과, Bhartṛhari/Bhartrihari
바르트리하리 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전.
바르트리하리(भर्तृहरि, Bhartṛhari)는 고대 인도의 서정 시인이다. 산스크리트 문학과 산스크리트어 문법에 영향을 끼쳤다.
===
29개의 언어 버전
출처 : 무료 백과 사전 "Wikipedia (Wikipedia)"
인도에 건너는 당승 의정의 ' 난카이 기귀내법전 ( 문화학자 바르트리하리 ) 에 관한 기술이 있다. 의정에 의하면, 바르트리하리는 문법학자 파니니에 대한 파탄 자리의 주석서 「마하바슈야」[3] 를 연구했다고 하고, 언어 철학서 「바키야·파디야 ( Vākya -padīya ) 문장 단어론(3장편)」[ 4] 를 썼다고 한다.
또한 시인으로서의 발토리 하리의 작품은 10 세기에서 14 세기에 걸쳐 3 종류의 "샤타카 ( Shataka ) (백뺨쇼시집)』[1] 로 정리되었다. 천국에 이르는 길에 대한 '이욕백배', 세속의 교제에 대한 '처세백배', 연애에 대한 '연애백배'의 3가지가 있어 '샤타카 트라 야 ( Śatakatraya ) ] 라고합니다. 17세기에는 아브라함 로겔 ( 영어판 ) 이 네덜란드어 로 번역, 유럽에도 전해졌다.
저작 (주된 일본어 연구) [ 편집 ]
- 우에무라 카츠히코『인도의 시인-바르토리하리와 빌하나』춘추사 , 1982년. NCID BN02072642 .
- 신판 「몽환의 사랑 인도시집」춘추사, 1998년. ISBN 978-4393132760 . - '삼백남' 번역, 논고 '발토리하리의 전설과 작품'을 수록
- 아카마츠 아키히코 번역·주해 『고전 인도의 언어 철학』 전 2권,平凡社〈동양 문고〉, 1998년. ISBN 978-4256194652 , 978-4256194669 . - '바키야 파디야'의 번역을 수록
출처・각주 [ 편집 ]
- ^ a b 코트 뱅크 .
- ^ 역본 『현대어 번역 난카이 기귀내법전 7세기 인도 불교 승려의 일상생활』미야바야시 아키히코· 가토 에이지 역, 법 장관 2004년/법장관 문고, 2022년. ISBN 978-4831826435
- ^ 무라카미 마코토 2018년 7월 20일. "파탄자리" . 일본 대백과 전서(닛포니카) . 코트뱅크 에서 2023년 5월 18일 열람 .
- ↑ 번역 수록:『고전 인도의 언어 철학』
- ↑ 기요시 마 히데키 『불교·인도 사상사전』 문법학파. 춘추사 , 1987년 4월 10일, 400페이지. ISBN 978-4393101025 .
- ^ 아카마츠 아키히코 『인도 철학 10강』 이와 나미 서점〈이와나미 신서〉, 2018년 3월 20일, 191쪽. ISBN 978-4004317098 .
- ↑ 번역 수록:『몽환의 사랑』
참고 문헌 [ 편집 ]
- 우에무라 카츠히코 『인도의 시인』의 해설
- 아카마츠 아키히코 「고전 인도의 언어 철학」의 해설
관련 항목 [ 편집 ]
외부 링크 [ 편집 ]
- 다나카 아오미야 . "발토리하리(인도의 산스크리트 서정시인)" . 일본 대백과 전서 ( 닛 포니카) .
- 마에다 전학 2018년 7월 20일. "발토리하리(고대 인도의 문법학자, 철학자)" . 일본 대백과 전서(닛포니카) . 코트뱅크 에서 2023년 5월 17일 열람 .
- 『발토리하리』 - 코트뱅크
Bhartṛhari
Bhartṛhari (Devanagari: भर्तृहरि; also romanised as Bhartrihari; fl. c. 5th century CE) was a Hindu linguistic philosopher[1] to whom are normally ascribed two influential Sanskrit texts:
- the Trikāṇḍī (including Vākyapadīya), on Sanskrit grammar and linguistic philosophy, a foundational text in the Indian grammatical tradition, explaining numerous theories on the word and on the sentence, including theories which came to be known under the name of Sphoṭa; in this work Bhartrhari also discussed logical problems such as the liar paradox and a paradox of unnameability or unsignifiability which has become known as Bhartrhari's paradox, and
- the Śatakatraya, a work of Sanskrit poetry, comprising three collections of about 100 stanzas each; it may or may not be by the same author who composed the two mentioned grammatical works.
In the medieval tradition of Indian scholarship, it was assumed that both texts were written by the same person.[citation needed] Modern philologists were sceptical of this claim, owing to an argument that dated the grammar to a date subsequent to the poetry.[citation needed] Since the 1990s, however, scholars have agreed that both works may indeed have been contemporary, in which case it is plausible that there was only one Bhartrihari who wrote both texts.[citation needed]
Both the grammar and the poetic works had an enormous influence in their respective fields. The grammar in particular, takes a holistic view of language, countering the compositionality position of the Mimamsakas and others.
According to Aithihyamala, he is also credited with some other texts like Harikītika and Amaru Shataka.
The poetry constitute short verses, collected into three centuries of about a hundred poems each. Each century deals with a different rasa or aesthetic mood; on the whole his poetic work has been very highly regarded both within the tradition and by modern scholarship.
The name Bhartrihari is also sometimes associated with Bhartrihari traya Shataka, the legendary king of Ujjaini in the 1st century.
Date and identity[edit]
The account of the Chinese traveller Yi-Jing indicates that Bhartrihari's grammar was known by 670 CE, and that he may have been Buddhist, which the poet was not. Based on this, scholarly opinion had formerly attributed the grammar to a separate author of the same name from the 7th century CE.[2] However, other evidence indicates a much earlier date:
Bhartrihari was long believed to have lived in the seventh century CE, but according to the testimony of the Chinese pilgrim Yijing [...] he was known to the Buddhist philosopher Dignaga, and this has pushed his date back to the fifth century CE.
— [3]
A period of c. 450–500[4] "definitely not later than 425–450",[5] or, following Erich Frauwallner, 450–510[6][7] or perhaps 400 CE or even earlier.[8]
Yi-Jing's other claim, that Bhartrihari was a Buddhist, does not seem to hold; his philosophical position is widely held to be an offshoot of the Vyakarana or grammarian school, closely allied to the realism of the Naiyayikas and distinctly opposed to Buddhist positions like Dignaga, who are closer to phenomenalism. It is also opposed to other Mimamsakas like Kumarila Bhatta.[9][10] However, some of his ideas subsequently influenced some Buddhist schools, which may have led Yi-Jing to surmise that he may have been Buddhist.
Thus, on the whole it seems likely that the traditional Sanskritist view, that the poet of the Śatakatraya is the same as the grammarian Bhartṛhari, may be accepted.
The leading Sanskrit scholar Ingalls (1968) submitted that "I see no reason why he should not have written poems as well as grammar and metaphysics", like Dharmakirti, Shankaracharya, and many others.[11] Yi Jing himself appeared to think they were the same person, as he wrote that (the grammarian) Bhartṛhari, author of the Vakyapadiya, was renowned for his vacillation between Buddhist monkhood and a life of pleasure, and for having written verses on the subject.[12][13]
Vākyapadīya[edit]
Bhartrihari's views on language build on that of earlier grammarians such as Patanjali, but were quite radical. A key element of his conception of language is the notion of sphoṭa – a term that may be based on an ancient grammarian, Sphoṭāyana, referred by Pāṇini,[14] now lost.
In his Mahabhashya, Patanjali (2nd century BCE) uses the term sphoṭa to denote the sound of language, the universal, while the actual sound (dhvani) may be long or short, or vary in other ways. This distinction may be thought to be similar to that of the present notion of phoneme. Bhatrihari however, applies the term sphota to each element of the utterance, varṇa the letter or syllable, pada the word, and vākya the sentence. To create the linguistic invariant, he argues that these must be treated as separate wholes (varṇasphoṭa, padasphoṭa and vākyasphoṭa respectively). For example, the same speech sound or varṇa may have different properties in different word contexts (e.g. assimilation), so that the sound cannot be discerned until the whole word is heard.
Further, Bhartrihari argues for a sentence-holistic view of meaning, saying that the meaning of an utterance is known only after the entire sentence (vākyasphoṭa) has been received, and it is not composed from the individual atomic elements or linguistic units which may change their interpretation based on later elements in the utterance. Further, words are understood only in the context of the sentence whose meaning as a whole is known. His argument for this was based on language acquisition, e.g. consider a child observing the exchange below:
- elder adult (uttama-vṛddha "full-grown"): says "bring the horse"
- younger adult (madhyama-vṛddha "half-grown"): reacts by bringing the horse
The child observing this may now learn that the unit "horse" refers to the animal. Unless the child knew the sentence meaning a priori, it would be difficult for him to infer the meaning of novel words. Thus, we grasp the sentence meaning as a whole, and reach words as parts of the sentence, and word meanings as parts of the sentence meaning through "analysis, synthesis and abstraction" (apoddhāra).[9]
The sphoṭa theory was influential, but it was opposed by many others. Later Mimamsakas like Kumarila Bhatta (c. 650 CE) strongly rejected the vākyasphoṭa view, and argued for the denotative power of each word, arguing for the composition of meanings (abhihitānvaya). The Prabhakara school (c. 670) among Mimamsakas however took a less atomistic position, arguing that word meanings exist, but are determined by context (anvitābhidhāna).
In a section of the chapter on Relation Bhartrhari discusses the liar paradox and identifies a hidden parameter which turns an unproblematic situation in daily life into a stubborn paradox. In addition, Bhartrhari discusses here a paradox that has been called "Bhartrhari's paradox" by Hans and Radhika Herzberger.[15] This paradox arises from the statement "this is unnameable" or "this is unsignifiable".
The Mahābhāṣya-dīpikā (also Mahābhāṣya-ṭīkā) is an early subcommentary on Patanjali's Vyākaraṇa-Mahābhāṣya, also attributed to Bhartṛhari.[16]
Śatakatraya[edit]
Bhartrihari's poetry is aphoristic, and comments on the social mores of the time. The collected work is known as Śatakatraya "the three śatakas or 'hundreds' ('centuries')", consisting of three thematic compilations on shringara, vairagya and niti (loosely: love, dispassion and moral conduct) of hundred verses each.
Unfortunately, the extant manuscript versions of these shatakas vary widely in the verses included. D.D. Kosambi has identified a kernel of two hundred that are common to all the versions.[11]
Here is a sample that comments on social mores:
yasyāsti vittaṃ sa naraḥ kulīnaḥ | A man of wealth is held to be high-born |
—#51 | —Translated by Barbara Stoler Miller |
And here is one dealing with the theme of love:
- The clear bright flame of a man's discernment dies
- When a girl clouds it with her lamp-black eyes. [Bhartrihari #77, tr. John Brough; poem 167][18]
Bhartrhari's paradox[edit]
Bhartrhari's paradox is the title of a 1981 paper by Hans and Radhika Herzberger[15] which drew attention to the discussion of self-referential paradoxes in the work Vākyapadīya attributed to Bhartṛhari.
In the chapter dealing with logical and linguistic relations, the Sambandha-samuddeśa, Bhartrhari discusses several statements of a paradoxical nature, including sarvam mithyā bravīmi "everything I am saying is false" which belongs to the liar paradox family, as well as the paradox arising from the statement that something is unnameable or unsignifiable (in Sanskrit: avācya): this becomes nameable or signifiable precisely by calling it unnameable or unsignifiable. When applied to integers, the latter is known today as Berry paradox.
Bhartrhari's interest lies not in strengthening this and other paradoxes by abstracting them from pragmatic context, but rather in exploring how a stubborn paradox may arise from unproblematic situations in daily communication.
An unproblematic situation of communication is turned into a paradox — we have either contradiction (virodha) or infinite regress (anavasthā) — when abstraction is made from the signification and its extension in time, by accepting a simultaneous, opposite function (apara vyāpāra) undoing the previous one.[19]
For Bhartrhari it is important to analyse and solve the unsignifiability paradox because he holds that what cannot be signified may nevertheless be indicated (vyapadiśyate) and it may be understood (pratīyate) to exist.
Works[edit]
Works attributed to Bhartr-hari include:[20]
- Trikāṇḍī ("three books"), sometimes known under the inaccurate title Vakyapadiya
- The author wrote the commentaries (vṛttis) on the first two books, and probably died before he could do it for the third book. The title Trikāṇḍī was probably not chosen by the author, who originally conceived them as "relatively independent" works, but later thought of unifying them.[21]
- Tripadi, also known as Mahabhashya-tika or Mahabhashya-dipika
- The earliest commentators on the text call it Tripadi, and the title Mahabhashya-dipika is known only from one manuscript.[22]
- The author probably intended to write a commentary on the entire text, but died after completing the work on the three padas of Maha-bhashya. The title Tripadi was probably coined by someone other than the author.[23]
- The currently surviving version of the work covers only the first seven ahnikas of the first pada of Mahabhashya. It is known from a fragmentary manuscript.[24]
- Shabda-dhatu-samiksha, now lost
- This work is attributed to Bharthari by the Kashmiri Shaivite authors Soma-nanda and Utpalacharya (9th-10th centuries). According to Utpalacharya, in this work, Bharthari described the concept of pashyanti, which he also discusses in the Trikandi.[25]
- Possibly, a commentary on Jaimini's Mimamsa Sutras
Tradition also attributes several other works to "Bharthari", although the authenticity of such attributions is doubtful.[26] For example, tradition identifies Bharthari the grammarian with the poet who composed Subhashita-tri-shati, a work said to contain 300 stanzas. However, the number of stanzas in the surviving text is much more than 300, which complicates the identification of its actual author.[25]
See also[edit]
Regarding Bhartrhari's paradox, see:
- B. K. Matilal, 1990, The Word and the World: India's Contribution to the Study of Language. Delhi: Oxford University Press. p. 129-130.
- Hemanta Kumar Ganguli, "Theory of Logical Construction and Solution of some Logical Paradoxes" , appendix to Philosophy of Logical Construction: An Examination of Logical Atomism and Logical Positivism in the light of the Philosophies of Bhartrhari, Dharmakirti and Prajnakaragupta, Calcutta, 1963.
- Jan E.M. Houben, The Sambandha-samuddeśa (chapter on relation) and Bhartrhari's philosophy of language, Gonda Indological Series, 2. Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 1995, pp. 213–219.
References[edit]
- ^ Cornille, Catherine (8 June 2020). The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Inter-Religious Dialogue. John Wiley & Sons. p. 199. ISBN 978-1-119-57259-6.
- ^ Hajime Nakamura (1990), A history of early Vedānta philosophy, Part 1, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., p. 80, ISBN 978-81-208-0651-1
- ^ Edward Craig, ed. (1998), Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy, Taylor & Francis, p. 764, ISBN 978-0-415-16916-5
- ^ Harold G. Coward (1976), Bhartṛhari, Twayne Publishers, ISBN 978-0-8057-6243-3
- ^ Saroja Bhate; Johannes Bronkhorst, eds. (1994), Bhartṛhari, philosopher and grammarian: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Bhartṛhari (University of Poona, January 6–8, 1992), Motilal Banarsidass Publ., p. 21, ISBN 978-81-208-1198-0
- ^ Mulakaluri Srimannarayana Murti (1997), Bhartṛhari, the grammarian, Sahitya Akademi, p. 10, ISBN 978-81-260-0308-2
- ^ Harold G. Coward; Karl H. Potter; K. Kunjunni Raja, eds. (1990), Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies: The philosophy of the grammarians, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., p. 121, ISBN 978-81-208-0426-5
- ^ George Cardona (1998), Pāṇini: a survey of research, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., p. 298, ISBN 978-81-208-1494-3. Detailed discussion, see also notes on p. 366.
- ^ Jump up to:a b Bimal Krishna Matilal (1990). The Word and the World: India's contribution to the study of language. Oxford University Press.
- ^ N. V. Isaeva (1995), From early Vedanta to Kashmir Shaivism: Gaudapada, Bhartrhari, and Abhinavagupta, SUNY Press, p. 75, ISBN 978-0-7914-2450-6Bhartrihari may have been "within the fold of Vedānta".
- ^ Jump up to:a b Vidyākara (1968), Daniel Henry Holmes Ingalls (ed.), Sanskrit poetry, from Vidyākara's Treasury, Harvard University Press, p. 39, ISBN 978-0-674-78865-7
- ^ Miller, Foreword and Introduction
- ^ A. K. Warder (1994), Indian kāvya literature: The ways of originality (Bāna to Dāmodaragupta), Motilal Banarsidass Publ., p. 121, ISBN 978-81-208-0449-4
- ^ Panini 6.1.123. The 10-century Haradatta assumed that Sphoṭāyana was the author of the sphoṭa theory.
- ^ Jump up to:a b Herzberger, Hans and Radhika Herzberger (1981). "Bhartrhari's Paradox" Journal of Indian Philosophy 9: 1-17 (slightly revised version of "Bhartrhari's Paradox" in Studies in Indian Philosophy. A memorial volume in honour of pandit Sukhlalji Sanghvi. (L.D. Series 84.) Gen. ed. Dalsukh Malvania et al. Ahmedabad, 1981).
- ^ Extensively used by later grammarians such as Kaiyaṭa, the text is only fragmentarily preserved. An edition based on an incomplete manuscript was published by Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune (1985-1991), in six fascicules (fascicule 6 in two parts).
- ^ Bhartrihari: Poems. Translated by Miller, Barbara Stoler. Columbia University Press. 1967. ISBN 9780231029995.
- ^ John Brough (trans.) (1977). Poems from the Sanskrit. Penguin. poem 12
- ^ Jan E.M. Houben, "Paradoxe et perspectivisme dans la philosophie de langage de Bhartrhari: langage, pensée et réalité", Bulletin d'Études Indiennes 19 (2001):173-199.
- ^ Ashok Aklujkar 1994, p. 33.
- ^ Ashok Aklujkar 1994, p. 25-26.
- ^ Harold G. Coward 1990, pp. 121–122.
- ^ Ashok Aklujkar 1994, p. 26.
- ^ Ashok Aklujkar 1994, p. 34.
- ^ Jump up to:a b Harold G. Coward 1990, p. 122.
- ^ Harold G. Coward 1990, p. 121.
Bibliography[edit]
- Ashok Aklujkar (1994). "An introduction to the study of Bhartṛ-hari". In Saroja Bhate; Johannes Bronkhorst (eds.). Bhartr̥hari, Philosopher and Grammarian. Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 9788120811980.
- Harold G. Coward; K. Kunjunni Raja, eds. (1990). The Philosophy of the Grammarians. Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies. Vol. 5. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 371. ISBN 9788120804265.
External links[edit]
